I was surprised to learn that the amount of oil produced from the two wells on Lancaster is restricted because of the volume of gas that needs to be flared. The quicker a solution is found to get the gas to market the sooner the gas can be sold to increase revenue.

I can see the reason for the rules and regulations on the UKCS towards flaring gas but that means I do not agree with this course of action. No doubt, global warming is the main reason for these restrictions.

I reckon the UK politicians are being subservient to the green lobby.

The amount of flared gas on the UKCS is miniscule in global terms. Just look at the environmental pollution caused by many oil producing nations and also many emerging and established economies. Just because the temperature of our planet has risen over the last few years doesn’t mean our climate is changing. Perhaps it’s simply the weather is fluctuating as it always has and always will. A whole industry has grown up around climate change, particularly on the BBC and in the universities, and many people have a vested interest to perpetuate the fears surrounding global warming.

For a UK politician or an establishment celebrity be a climate change denier is political and social suicide. And so their climate change agenda simply goes on and on and on.

I prefer to keep an open mind on climate change and won’t be influenced by the media one way or another.

I can see the reason for the rules and regulations on the UKCS towards flaring gas but that means I do not agree with this course of action. No doubt, global warming is the main reason for these restrictions.

Not really; even if you enclose the gas in a pipe and pipe it ashore and its ultimate fate is to be burnt, then there is no difference the GW effect. The benefit is that the energy is not wasted in a flare, so it is really a drive to be more efficient. But there is quite a lot of energy spent in providing the gas pipelines to shore, so as with the finance, it will be a few years before the energy saved from stopping flaring is equal to the energy locked up in the gas pipeline etc.

As regards Climate Change, it is an established fact that we cycle through Ice Ages and that the last one was

Science has struggled to explain fully why an ice age occurs every 100,000 years. As researchers now demonstrate based on a computer simulation, not only do variations in insolation play a key role, but also the mutual influence of glaciated...

If the species, homo sapiens, thinks it can control the climate of the third rock from the sun, the arrogance of this altruistic species simply beggars belief.

It’s an interesting point you have made when you write that any gas saved through controlling flaring is offset by the burning of the gas, when, instead of flaring it is sold to be used commercially.

I can’t see the logic of controlling flaring at the expense of oil production when the UK is desperate to reduce it’s dependency of imported oil. However, when did logic ever apply with some aspects of government control and legislation?

The link you provide re an Ice Age every 100,00 years is interesting. The theory of the cause of the Ice Age being the Earth’s orbit around the sun. If our species is still around, which I very much doubt, by the next Ice Age, I wonder if they will try to change the orbit of the Earth?

As Archimedes said "Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world. "

The theory of the cause of the Ice Age being the Earth’s orbit around the sun. If our species is still around, which I very much doubt, by the next Ice Age, I wonder if they will try to change the orbit of the Earth?

We will certainly be around for the next ice age:
`The planet has experienced ice age conditions, punctuated every 100,000 years or so by brief warm intervals. These warm periods, called interglacials, typically last around 10,000 years. Our current interglacial began around 11,000 years ago. Could we be on the brink of the end of our interglacial?’

Arctic sea ice is melting and the Greenland ice sheet is losing mass at an accelerating rate. These are hardly good conditions for an imminent ice age.

So you can relax, unless you happen to live close to the beach asAccording to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, “If the Greenland Ice Sheet melted, scientists estimate that sea level would rise about 6 meters (20 feet). If the Antarctic Ice Sheet melted, sea level would rise by about 60 meters (200 feet).”

All we need to do is stop producing CO2 and we can stick with the status

"“According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, “If the Greenland Ice Sheet melted, scientists estimate that sea level would rise about 6 meters (20 feet). If the Antarctic Ice Sheet melted, sea level would rise by about 60 meters (200 feet).””

There are so many people with a vested interest in the climate change debate that it’s difficult to ascertain who is right and who is wrong. If the interglacial period of approx 10,000 years started about 11,000 years ago surely we must be entering into a phase of global cooling.

The following link shows that despite what the so called experts are saying about global warming this link shows that some Pacific islands are growing. I can’t recall any of these experts mentioning this.

Well spotted and rather intriguing. I note that some of these islands are volcanic and hence could be growing despite a rise in sea level. Equally the coral organisms are adding enough material. to keep pace with the sea level rise.

Eight anchors and ground chains are to be pre-laid on the sea bed commencing 15th January. Does anyone know the identity of the ships involved in the anchoring operation for the future GWA drilling?
I now like ship watching!

One useful thing to do is add markers to the marinetraffic map for positions of interest…
That then makes it easier to zoom in to the right place to see if any ships are “on our patch”
[Layers] [My Custom Areas] to add a marker.
For example, here I have marked the Lancaster buoy, piles, and the manifold near the two wells.

What does this board think about the “pre-laiding” of anchors for the Transocean Leader?

I have read the comments on LSE where some oaf claimed to have suggested this to Hurricanes BoD 18 months ago.

My problem with this is , what will the Transocean Leader use for anchors while they are being per-laid for Hurricane?

Either the Transocean Leader has two sets of anchors, or the anchors will be transported on completion of works by separate vessel from Transocean Leaders present location to Lincoln potentially saving a best a couple of days.